Quick Links

The trinity broken (video)

Comments

I suppose the most important comment to make (and it might be buried in the 21 pages I didn't have time to read) is that 1 trial is not definitive.

That said, self heals both single target and AoE certainly do make everyone some sort of healer even when not specced and some classes which are 'not tanks' can tank reasonably well.

I don't think the trinity is dead but rather not as much of a necessity. Which is good as you often can't get a 'party' to tackle the local event Hero, or even a short non-instanced dungeon for some quests.

All in all though, a party with at least a specced healer and tank will probably do better for regular runs particularly for guild groups (e.g. non-PUG). (Haven't tinkered with tanks during the BWEs so not sure about their aggro holding mechanics).

With GW2 everyone needs to know when to save their self heals. When they need to lay down their support to help everyone threw hard points. When you need to focus fire to DPS down adds. At any moment it could be your turn to tank for 3-60 seconds. Every class has tools to do that. ...

This is one of the reasons I keep saying the trinity is not dead. Every team member needs to know all 3 roles to be able to do team play. You cant focuse only on one role. In the length of a boss fight you need to be able to play all 3 areas of your char well. If you suck at one of them, just like any chain, a team is only as strong as its weakest link.

Do you seriously expect me to believe you can't see how self-contradictory you are when you compare the first statement with the rest?

Let me regurgitate while you go up and ponder whether or not my mesmer is a tank, healer or dps. The trinity is dead. There are no tanks. You cannot pull and hold aggro while absorbing all the damage the boss is delivering thanks to a targetting healer off to the side (which also doesn't exist).

If I see an ally in trouble, I may whip out my greatsword and knock the foe(s) flying away from the ally then shatter my clones, crippling the foe allowing my ally a breather. Tank, healer or dps? (Hint: None of the above.) That's a combination of control and indirect support all at once due to using the right skill at the right time. You CANNOT say someone is switching roles simply because they used a skill with a damage, control or support apsect associated with that. It's ridiculous. This is exactly why I reiterate over and over again... THERE ARE NO ROLES in GW2. Period. You can give yourself a more damage, control or support heavy build, but your skills completely remove the pigeonholing any of the archaic roles would hold you into. I press 1, I'm doing damage. Hit 5, enemy goes flying (control) and moves into a more optimal range for my laser, control setting up damage. Phantasms that provide regeneration to allies... damage and support. Chaos storm, all three at the same time.

So let go of this argument. No one is buying it and it's not flattering on you.

With GW2 everyone needs to know when to save their self heals. When they need to lay down their support to help everyone threw hard points. When you need to focus fire to DPS down adds. At any moment it could be your turn to tank for 3-60 seconds. Every class has tools to do that. ...

This is one of the reasons I keep saying the trinity is not dead. Every team member needs to know all 3 roles to be able to do team play. You cant focuse only on one role. In the length of a boss fight you need to be able to play all 3 areas of your char well. If you suck at one of them, just like any chain, a team is only as strong as its weakest link.

Do you seriously expect me to believe you can't see how self-contradictory you are when you compare the first statement with the rest?

Let me regurgitate while you go up and ponder whether or not my mesmer is a tank, healer or dps. The trinity is dead. There are no tanks. You cannot pull and hold aggro while absorbing all the damage the boss is delivering thanks to a targetting healer off to the side (which also doesn't exist).

If I see an ally in trouble, I may whip out my greatsword and knock the foe(s) flying away from the ally then shatter my clones, crippling the foe allowing my ally a breather. Tank, healer or dps? (Hint: None of the above.) That's a combination of control and indirect support all at once due to using the right skill at the right time. You CANNOT say someone is switching roles simply because they used a skill with a damage, control or support apsect associated with that. It's ridiculous. This is exactly why I reiterate over and over again... THERE ARE NO ROLES in GW2. Period. You can give yourself a more damage, control or support heavy build, but your skills completely remove the pigeonholing any of the archaic roles would hold you into. I press 1, I'm doing damage. Hit 5, enemy goes flying (control) and moves into a more optimal range for my laser, control setting up damage. Phantasms that provide regeneration to allies... damage and support. Chaos storm, all three at the same time.

So let go of this argument. No one is buying it and it's not flattering on you.

LOL no roles? Man do you fail. Epic fail even!!! LOL LOL LOL not even people who may agree with you there is no trinity wont agree with that. Next!

With GW2 everyone needs to know when to save their self heals. When they need to lay down their support to help everyone threw hard points. When you need to focus fire to DPS down adds. At any moment it could be your turn to tank for 3-60 seconds. Every class has tools to do that. ...

This is one of the reasons I keep saying the trinity is not dead. Every team member needs to know all 3 roles to be able to do team play. You cant focuse only on one role. In the length of a boss fight you need to be able to play all 3 areas of your char well. If you suck at one of them, just like any chain, a team is only as strong as its weakest link.

Do you seriously expect me to believe you can't see how self-contradictory you are when you compare the first statement with the rest?

Let me regurgitate while you go up and ponder whether or not my mesmer is a tank, healer or dps. The trinity is dead. There are no tanks. You cannot pull and hold aggro while absorbing all the damage the boss is delivering thanks to a targetting healer off to the side (which also doesn't exist).

If I see an ally in trouble, I may whip out my greatsword and knock the foe(s) flying away from the ally then shatter my clones, crippling the foe allowing my ally a breather. Tank, healer or dps? (Hint: None of the above.) That's a combination of control and indirect support all at once due to using the right skill at the right time. You CANNOT say someone is switching roles simply because they used a skill with a damage, control or support apsect associated with that. It's ridiculous. This is exactly why I reiterate over and over again... THERE ARE NO ROLES in GW2. Period. You can give yourself a more damage, control or support heavy build, but your skills completely remove the pigeonholing any of the archaic roles would hold you into. I press 1, I'm doing damage. Hit 5, enemy goes flying (control) and moves into a more optimal range for my laser, control setting up damage. Phantasms that provide regeneration to allies... damage and support. Chaos storm, all three at the same time.

So let go of this argument. No one is buying it and it's not flattering on you.

LOL no roles? Man do you fail. Epic fail even!!! LOL LOL LOL not even people who may agree with you there is no trinity wont agree with that. Next!

Lovely way to avoid all the points. Yet, I'll stand by that. There are no roles. There can't be. You have damage, control and support aspects across every skillset and it's a matter of using the right skills at the right time. I challenge you to demonstrate otherwise. Show me any one build that can do nothing but heal or tank, or nothing but DPS. Even better, demonstrate how that "pure" build would be more effective in the group scenario than someone who's balanced and situationally aware. Oh, you may actually want to address the points of the post you choose to ignore with your "lol" comments. If you can.

You do realize that what you posted simply makes no sense and contradicts itself, right?

The trinity is about SPECIALIZATION, you can't claim this game has a trinity if you are saying everyone is/has to act like a hybrid...

But there is, my Guardian spec I can DPS, Tank in the team like every class but my sustain heal is higher then any other class can do. My wife Elementalist can do Tanking and healing but no class can AoE like she can. This is another reason I dont think the trinity is dead in GW2. There is specilaization. There would need to be a balance added to GW2 where all classes do all the roles equal and they dont. I am intrested to see how ANet handles that come launch. My guess is they will leave it as is. You watch, 6 months from now guilds will be calling for people who play sustain heal guardian specs, Debuff necro specs, Elementalist AoE specs. Why? Because it gives a 3% boost here and a 5% boost there. You may not see it, but the top end guilds have been testing this for months. They have battle plans set up for its in WvW and Dungeons and they rocked both. Not saying 1 person do all the healing or the tanking in the old school trinity set up. Just specialized in what they do best enough to break ahead of the pack.

This is my Guardian build and I am telling you, 2 vs 4 we would win most times. Rocked in dungeons as well. I played all 3 roles but my healing was high enough it made a HUGE difference.

I might have expressed myself badly, yes you can specialize, but not to a point you can simply stop using part of your skills and play effectively, no matter how speciallized you are you will still want to bring condition removal and stun breakers to spvp (maybe not the condition removal if you have a specialized support that can remove conditions from multiple targets).

The trinity that has a need for dedicated healers, dps and tanks is dead. Healers are unnecessary in a game that has a philosophy based on avoiding damage rather than refilling health bars continually. Tanks are rather useless in a game that has no threat and aggro mechanics (or in which these are rather elusive) and can't even sustain 2 blows from a boss before having to retreat. What remains is DPS, which as far as I know is universal in any kind of action game.

In a sense the trinity is still in, but unlike other games that used the "HOLY TRINITY" of ultra specialization and passing the hot potato to someone else's hands. The gw2 trinity: damage mitigation (through reactive dodging), dps and sustain. The game promotes a lot more personal skill than the likes of WoW (yes I went there).

With GW2 everyone needs to know when to save their self heals. When they need to lay down their support to help everyone threw hard points. When you need to focus fire to DPS down adds. At any moment it could be your turn to tank for 3-60 seconds. Every class has tools to do that. ...

This is one of the reasons I keep saying the trinity is not dead. Every team member needs to know all 3 roles to be able to do team play. You cant focuse only on one role. In the length of a boss fight you need to be able to play all 3 areas of your char well. If you suck at one of them, just like any chain, a team is only as strong as its weakest link.

Do you seriously expect me to believe you can't see how self-contradictory you are when you compare the first statement with the rest?

Let me regurgitate while you go up and ponder whether or not my mesmer is a tank, healer or dps. The trinity is dead. There are no tanks. You cannot pull and hold aggro while absorbing all the damage the boss is delivering thanks to a targetting healer off to the side (which also doesn't exist).

If I see an ally in trouble, I may whip out my greatsword and knock the foe(s) flying away from the ally then shatter my clones, crippling the foe allowing my ally a breather. Tank, healer or dps? (Hint: None of the above.) That's a combination of control and indirect support all at once due to using the right skill at the right time. You CANNOT say someone is switching roles simply because they used a skill with a damage, control or support apsect associated with that. It's ridiculous. This is exactly why I reiterate over and over again... THERE ARE NO ROLES in GW2. Period. You can give yourself a more damage, control or support heavy build, but your skills completely remove the pigeonholing any of the archaic roles would hold you into. I press 1, I'm doing damage. Hit 5, enemy goes flying (control) and moves into a more optimal range for my laser, control setting up damage. Phantasms that provide regeneration to allies... damage and support. Chaos storm, all three at the same time.

So let go of this argument. No one is buying it and it's not flattering on you.

LOL no roles? Man do you fail. Epic fail even!!! LOL LOL LOL not even people who may agree with you there is no trinity wont agree with that. Next!

Lovely way to avoid all the points. Yet, I'll stand by that. There are no roles. There can't be. You have damage, control and support aspects across every skillset and it's a matter of using the right skills at the right time. I challenge you to demonstrate otherwise. Show me any one build that can do nothing but heal or tank, or nothing but DPS. Even better, demonstrate how that "pure" build would be more effective in the group scenario than someone who's balanced and situationally aware. Oh, you may actually want to address the points of the post you choose to ignore with your "lol" comments. If you can.

Every class plays all the roles, every class has CC, Tank, DPS, Healing and buff/debuff. The game mechanics are all there. Each class does 1-2 of them better then the rest. Guardian best at damage mitagation with healing and shields, Necro with buff/debuffs. Elementlist with top AoE damage. Warrior with best close ranged DPS. All the roles are there, to say they are not is really naive. As I have said before, really awesome orgnized guilds have been testing what classes do what role best and making builds that lean to their strengths. Not saying they will only do one role but the build ends up being 20% tank 30% DPS and 50% healing. It not only works but is OP. Wining most fights in WvW because everyone speced to their classes strength, as in what role they do best.

Every class plays all the roles, every class has CC, Tank, DPS, Healing and buff/debuff. The game mechanics are all there. Each class does 1-2 of them better then the rest. Guardian best at damage mitagation with healing and shields, Necro with buff/debuffs. Elementlist with top AoE damage. Warrior with best close ranged DPS. All the roles are there, to say they are not is really naive. As I have said before, really awesome orgnized guilds have been testing what classes do what role best and making builds that lean to their strengths. Not saying they will only do one role but the build ends up being 20% tank 30% DPS and 50% healing. It not only works but is OP. Wining most fights in WvW because everyone speced to their classes strength, as in what role they do best.

Interesting. I can't tell if you don't or refuse to grasp the most simple concepts of GW2 combat. I suspect at this point you're resorting to trolling tactics, and I say that to give you the benefit of the doubt regarding intelligence. Case in point:

Guardian best at damage mitagation with healing and shields, Necro with buff/debuffs. Elementlist with top AoE damage. Warrior with best close ranged DPS.

Not one of these represents a leg of the "holy trinity". You know this. Everyone else knows this. It's even disputable. I can mitigate as much as a guardian on my mesmer through interrupts, knockbacks, cripples, etc. Possibly more in some situations. If a melee based character/mob can't reach me, it can't do any damage at all. If they use their big attacks on the wrong targets, it's all wasted.

Every class plays all the roles, every class has CC, Tank, DPS, Healing and buff/debuff. The game mechanics are all there. Each class does 1-2 of them better then the rest. Guardian best at damage mitagation with healing and shields, Necro with buff/debuffs. Elementlist with top AoE damage. Warrior with best close ranged DPS. All the roles are there, to say they are not is really naive. As I have said before, really awesome orgnized guilds have been testing what classes do what role best and making builds that lean to their strengths. Not saying they will only do one role but the build ends up being 20% tank 30% DPS and 50% healing. It not only works but is OP. Wining most fights in WvW because everyone speced to their classes strength, as in what role they do best.

Interesting. I can't tell if you don't or refuse to grasp the most simple concepts of GW2 combat. I suspect at this point you're resorting to trolling tactics, and I say that to give you the benefit of the doubt regarding intelligence. Case in point:

Guardian best at damage mitagation with healing and shields, Necro with buff/debuffs. Elementlist with top AoE damage. Warrior with best close ranged DPS.

Not one of these represents a leg of the "holy trinity". You know this. Everyone else knows this. It's even disputable. I can mitigate as much as a guardian on my mesmer through interrupts, knockbacks, cripples, etc. Possibly more in some situations. If a melee based character/mob can't reach me, it can't do any damage at all. If they use their big attacks on the wrong targets, it's all wasted.

Oh... 20% tank . Lol. Tanks in GW2. You silly.

Most of my MMOing time has been spent as a healer or a tank. Been MMOing for 14 years and I can tell you better then most what it takes to tank. Most think its taunt/AC/hp. It does not. It comes down to 1 factor, damage mititgation. It can come from all sorts of things, skills, AC, pasive skills. I have played tanks in MMOs that had low hp and AC and all the tanking came from pasive skills, evasion, parries and dodges and combos that triggered from them. Tanking is just one thing, damage mitigation and every class in GW2 has it. Short burts of it, some longer then others but they all have it. You take your Mesmer into WoW and your skill set would break that game. Because its not just a knock back and cripples. Its controling the DPS output for to long to be considered anything else but damage mitigation.

Interesting. I can't tell if you don't or refuse to grasp the most simple concepts of GW2 combat. I suspect at this point you're resorting to trolling tactics, and I say that to give you the benefit of the doubt regarding intelligence. Case in point:

Guardian best at damage mitagation with healing and shields, Necro with buff/debuffs. Elementlist with top AoE damage. Warrior with best close ranged DPS.

Not one of these represents a leg of the "holy trinity". You know this. Everyone else knows this. It's even disputable. I can mitigate as much as a guardian on my mesmer through interrupts, knockbacks, cripples, etc. Possibly more in some situations. If a melee based character/mob can't reach me, it can't do any damage at all. If they use their big attacks on the wrong targets, it's all wasted.

Oh... 20% tank . Lol. Tanks in GW2. You silly.

Most of my MMOing time has been spent as a healer or a tank. Been MMOing for 14 years and I can tell you better then most what it takes to tank. Most think its taunt/AC/hp. It does not. It comes down to 1 factor, damage mititgation. It can come from all sorts of things, skills, AC, pasive skills. I have played tanks in MMOs that had low hp and AC and all the tanking came from pasive skills, evasion, parries and dodges and combos that triggered from them. Tanking is just one thing, damage mitigation and every class in GW2 has it. Short burts of it, some longer then others but they all have it. You take your Mesmer into WoW and your skill set would break that game. Because its not just a knock back and cripples. Its controling the DPS output for to long to be considered anything else but damage mitigation.

So now you're saying my mesmer is a tank? All professions are? You've moved the goalposts so far they're obstructing traffic in the parking lot now.

Interesting. I can't tell if you don't or refuse to grasp the most simple concepts of GW2 combat. I suspect at this point you're resorting to trolling tactics, and I say that to give you the benefit of the doubt regarding intelligence. Case in point:

Guardian best at damage mitagation with healing and shields, Necro with buff/debuffs. Elementlist with top AoE damage. Warrior with best close ranged DPS.

Not one of these represents a leg of the "holy trinity". You know this. Everyone else knows this. It's even disputable. I can mitigate as much as a guardian on my mesmer through interrupts, knockbacks, cripples, etc. Possibly more in some situations. If a melee based character/mob can't reach me, it can't do any damage at all. If they use their big attacks on the wrong targets, it's all wasted.

Oh... 20% tank . Lol. Tanks in GW2. You silly.

Most of my MMOing time has been spent as a healer or a tank. Been MMOing for 14 years and I can tell you better then most what it takes to tank. Most think its taunt/AC/hp. It does not. It comes down to 1 factor, damage mititgation. It can come from all sorts of things, skills, AC, pasive skills. I have played tanks in MMOs that had low hp and AC and all the tanking came from pasive skills, evasion, parries and dodges and combos that triggered from them. Tanking is just one thing, damage mitigation and every class in GW2 has it. Short burts of it, some longer then others but they all have it. You take your Mesmer into WoW and your skill set would break that game. Because its not just a knock back and cripples. Its controling the DPS output for to long to be considered anything else but damage mitigation.

So now you're saying my mesmer is a tank? All professions are? You've moved the goalposts so far they're obstructing traffic in the parking lot now.

Ok, let me ask you a question. Can every class in GW2 stand toe to toe with a boss for 3-60 seconds? You know the answer is yes. What about other MMOs? Only a select few classes can stand toe to toe with any boss and the only ones that could were classes with high damage mitigation, TANKS! Matter of fact, in a team everyone will take turns having the boss attention for 3-60 seconds and have to use their tools to live and keep the team going. Hmmm sounds like what a tank does in every MMO I have played. Now the build you made fun of, 20% tank, 30% DPS and 50% heal. What would happen in GW2 if they speced 50% heal and 50% DPS. When the boss came to them it would be end game. 20% tank is all thats needed. Every class plays every role. All the standard MMO roles are there in GW2 just delivered in a new and fresh way. I personally love it but it is what it is. A soft trinity and many game reviewer has called it such! Trinity is still there.

You called me a troll and I want to really let you know I am not trolling. Why I care about this topic? Many people wont play this game because they think with no trinity it must be an easy mode game. A team of all DPS walking into a dungeon and winning must be a easy mode game. When it fact that team of all DPS were in fact 50% dps 20% Tank and 30% utility. Or something to that effect. Its how ANet designed the game. GW2 is more challenging then most MMOs because everyone has to be ready to switch play styles on the fly to play any one of the roles to have your team win. If you think you can win by playing DPS 90% of the time, you will lose. You try and play healing 90% of the time, same results. Everyone will play all the roles at some point if you want to be good and you want your team to win. Its why I dont think the trinity is dead. I also think its bad marketing and truning some people away from the game.

Ok, let me ask you a question. Can every class in GW2 stand toe to toe with a boss for 3-60 seconds? You know the answer is yes. What about other MMOs? Only a select few classes can stand toe to toe with any boss and the only ones that could were classes with high damage mitigation, TANKS! Matter of fact, in a team everyone will take turns having the boss attention for 3-60 seconds and have to use their tools to live and keep the team going. Hmmm sounds like what a tank does in every MMO I have played. Now the build you made fun of, 20% tank, 30% DPS and 50% heal. What would happen in GW2 if they speced 50% heal and 50% DPS. When the boss came to them it would be end game. 20% tank is all thats needed. Every class plays every role. All the standard MMO roles are there in GW2 just delivered in a new and fresh way. I personally love it but it is what it is. A soft trinity and many game reviewer has called it such! Trinity is still there.

Can they? Possibly... my mesmer can stand with three seconds of distortion, but when that wears off it's dirt nap time. Does that make me a tank? Hell no, not even close. I can, however, keep that boss from getting toe to toe with me in the first place simply by using the right skills at the right time. Some cripples here, maybe a knockback if the boss isn't immune. Blink to that spot over there. None of these abilities represent tanking however. They're just some of the control features I can apply while simultaneously applying damage and supporting my allies.

That's the part you refuse to allow to sink it. You do it all simultaneously. You're not locked into a role healing, tanking, whatever. An elementalist with a staff can prevent more damage laying down an ice fields (allowing allies to add distance to the foes) than they can with their splash heals on 20 and 45 second cooldowns (iirc). They can prevent even more switching over to earth and applying more control, and more again switching to fire and killing off the crippled foes altogether. The best elementalists will dance through their attunements like Baryshnikov across the stage, using all their skills at need and never trying to settle into one of the archaic roles. The best warriors will be dancing in and out of melee range, adding their own bursts of damage and control keeping the foes off balance and from being able to close on allies while supporting said allies through their own shouts, etc. The mesmer will sow the seeds of confusion, clones shattering like stained glass in a storm of chaos, sending foes flying and unable to engage their allies, while applying their own damage and supporting allies.

FInal note... people call it a "soft trinity" for a couple reasons. First, they don't know what the hell to call it. It's that simple. People will, as a rule, create familiar labels to try and quantify the unfamiliar. We can't help it, it's how we're wired. Second, they think of the damage, control and support aspects, see "three", think "trinity that isn't", so add soft. (Ties into 1.) Finally, no one has seen the fully realized combat system in play yet simply because no one has the experience to really let it fly without archaic mindsets getting in the way. Yet. In a nutshell, the trinity is dead, people simply haven't all moved on and accepted that loss.

You called me a troll and I want to really let you know I am not trolling. Why I care about this topic? Many people wont play this game because they think with no trinity it must be an easy mode game. A team of all DPS walking into a dungeon and winning must be a easy mode game. When it fact that team of all DPS were in fact 50% dps 20% Tank and 30% utility. Or something to that effect. Its how ANet designed the game. GW2 is more challenging then most MMOs because everyone has to be ready to switch play styles on the fly to play any one of the roles to have your team win. If you think you can win by playing DPS 90% of the time, you will lose. You try and play healing 90% of the time, same results. Everyone will play all the roles at some point if you want to be good and you want your team to win. Its why I dont think the trinity is dead. I also think its bad marketing and truning some people away from the game.

Major fallacy with this argument. You don't switch playstyles on the fly. Your traits are set in combat, if you're more tilted towards support, that won't change. What you're doing is using skills with the damage, control and support aspects situationally, during a single fight. Quite literally, you're one button away from applying control, or support, or damage... and more often than not you're doing multiples of those on a single skill. With a single cast I can lay down a chaos storm that damages the foes, forces the foes to move out of it (means of control), applies conditions to the foes and also applies boons to the allies in the area. That's not taking on a role. That's using a skill at the right time, nothing more (yet also everything at once).

Isn't the origin of the term from EQ? Warrior, Cleric, and Enchanter. These are static classes specifically for tanking, healing and crowd control.

It seem the issue in this thread is that the classic definition of this term assigns staticly the class to a role (Warrior-Tank, Cleric-Healer, Enchanter-CC). You quite literally need these three classes to form a viable group. Obviously, GW2 does not have this restriction.

If we change the definition or come up with an alternative called Soft Trinity we talk only about the roles not the classes. The problem is it's still kind of confusing because many games, even non-MMO games, offer these roles. To further confuse it for GW2, the roles are fluid in that any one class maybe handling one or all three at any given time. Seems like we are at this point far from the origin of the term.

So for some of you for the trinity to be dead it isn't enough for the static class - role assignment to be destroyed the actual roles need to be new.

The internets was built to argue over such dogma. I don't see an end in site.

Isn't the origin of the term from EQ? Warrior, Cleric, and Enchanter. These are static classes specifically for tanking, healing and crowd control.

It seem the issue in this thread is that the classic definition of this term assigns staticly the class to a role (Warrior-Tank, Cleric-Healer, Enchanter-CC). You quite literally need these three classes to form a viable group. Obviously, GW2 does not have this restriction.

If we change the definition or come up with an alternative called Soft Trinity we talk only about the roles not the classes. The problem is it's still kind of confusing because many games, even non-MMO games, offer these roles. To further confuse it for GW2, the roles are fluid in that any one class maybe handling one or all three at any given time. Seems like we are at this point far from the origin of the term.

So for some of you for the trinity to be dead it isn't enough for the static class - role assignment to be destroyed the actual roles need to be new.

The internets was built to argue over such dogma. I don't see an end in site.

Ya because of GW2 it has spawned 2 new terms, EQ is a hard trinity: where classes focused on 1 role. GW2 is a soft trinity: Where all classes take truns at all of the roles. Some have taken it to far and yelling there is no trinity and making some view this game as easy and for soft gamers. Its not! If anything its harder.

Isn't the origin of the term from EQ? Warrior, Cleric, and Enchanter. These are static classes specifically for tanking, healing and crowd control.

It seem the issue in this thread is that the classic definition of this term assigns staticly the class to a role (Warrior-Tank, Cleric-Healer, Enchanter-CC). You quite literally need these three classes to form a viable group. Obviously, GW2 does not have this restriction.

If we change the definition or come up with an alternative called Soft Trinity we talk only about the roles not the classes. The problem is it's still kind of confusing because many games, even non-MMO games, offer these roles. To further confuse it for GW2, the roles are fluid in that any one class maybe handling one or all three at any given time. Seems like we are at this point far from the origin of the term.

So for some of you for the trinity to be dead it isn't enough for the static class - role assignment to be destroyed the actual roles need to be new.

The internets was built to argue over such dogma. I don't see an end in site.

EQ kinda started it...but it was very loose. the vast majority of non-raid encounters could be done with any combination of players. It was noticed that with a dedicated damage soaker and dedicated heals and controls, there was MUCH less downtime between fights and people generally progressed faster.

WoW and EQ2 solidified it. They said "This guy is a tank, he does nothing but tank. This guy only heals..." etc. Thanks to that, the concept of downtime in MMOs has been largely eliminated..and that is a GREAT thing. Sitting there getting your health and manage back for 3-4 minutes after every 30 second fight was not fun.

The problem is now it's gone TOO specialist. Raids and even team encounters require a very specific makeup, and waiting hours for one person to come along to fill a given role are the rule, not the exception. As Blizzard is fond of saying, it has become "Bring the class, not the player" methodology. They've altered their mechanics to be "Bring the role" instead, but it still doesn't help. A system like GW2's, if successful, removes the need to EVER exclude someone just because you need a specific role. As long as you have 5 competent players, the exact makeup is irrelevant. And that is fantastic if it works.

Ya because of GW2 it has spawned 2 new terms, EQ is a hard trinity: where classes focused on 1 role. GW2 is a soft trinity: Where all classes take truns at all of the roles. Some have taken it to far and yelling there is no trinity and making some view this game as easy and for soft gamers. Its not! If anything its harder.

you seem concerned with the notion that people are goign to equate a game having no trinity with being easy or simple. that is false, it is evidence of poor logic, and you shouldn't try too hard to sway the opinions of such individuals through rhetoric. the concept isn't based on rationality so rationality is most likely not going to change their minds.

as far as the trinity.. if switching from tanking damage through mitigation, dealing damage, and healing on the fly makes a game a trinity game or gives it some form of trinity -- hard or soft.. that makes Zelda 2 a trinity game.

or maybe Zelda 2 has a "soft trinity".. i don't know..

its fine by me if you want to look at it that way but i probably never will.

Isn't the origin of the term from EQ? Warrior, Cleric, and Enchanter. These are static classes specifically for tanking, healing and crowd control.

It seem the issue in this thread is that the classic definition of this term assigns staticly the class to a role (Warrior-Tank, Cleric-Healer, Enchanter-CC). You quite literally need these three classes to form a viable group. Obviously, GW2 does not have this restriction.

If we change the definition or come up with an alternative called Soft Trinity we talk only about the roles not the classes. The problem is it's still kind of confusing because many games, even non-MMO games, offer these roles. To further confuse it for GW2, the roles are fluid in that any one class maybe handling one or all three at any given time. Seems like we are at this point far from the origin of the term.

So for some of you for the trinity to be dead it isn't enough for the static class - role assignment to be destroyed the actual roles need to be new.

The internets was built to argue over such dogma. I don't see an end in site.

EQ kinda started it...but it was very loose. the vast majority of non-raid encounters could be done with any combination of players. It was noticed that with a dedicated damage soaker and dedicated heals and controls, there was MUCH less downtime between fights and people generally progressed faster.

WoW and EQ2 solidified it. They said "This guy is a tank, he does nothing but tank. This guy only heals..." etc. Thanks to that, the concept of downtime in MMOs has been largely eliminated..and that is a GREAT thing. Sitting there getting your health and manage back for 3-4 minutes after every 30 second fight was not fun.

The problem is now it's gone TOO specialist. Raids and even team encounters require a very specific makeup, and waiting hours for one person to come along to fill a given role are the rule, not the exception. As Blizzard is fond of saying, it has become "Bring the class, not the player" methodology. They've altered their mechanics to be "Bring the role" instead, but it still doesn't help. A system like GW2's, if successful, removes the need to EVER exclude someone just because you need a specific role. As long as you have 5 competent players, the exact makeup is irrelevant. And that is fantastic if it works.

Ya gone are the day of waiting 30 min to try and find a class. Or telling your friend he cant come because you dont need another DPS class. As long as everyone on your team know how to play their class to the full you can do any content with any classes.

Isn't the origin of the term from EQ? Warrior, Cleric, and Enchanter. These are static classes specifically for tanking, healing and crowd control.

It seem the issue in this thread is that the classic definition of this term assigns staticly the class to a role (Warrior-Tank, Cleric-Healer, Enchanter-CC). You quite literally need these three classes to form a viable group. Obviously, GW2 does not have this restriction.

If we change the definition or come up with an alternative called Soft Trinity we talk only about the roles not the classes. The problem is it's still kind of confusing because many games, even non-MMO games, offer these roles. To further confuse it for GW2, the roles are fluid in that any one class maybe handling one or all three at any given time. Seems like we are at this point far from the origin of the term.

So for some of you for the trinity to be dead it isn't enough for the static class - role assignment to be destroyed the actual roles need to be new.

The internets was built to argue over such dogma. I don't see an end in site.

Ya because of GW2 it has spawned 2 new terms, EQ is a hard trinity: where classes focused on 1 role. GW2 is a soft trinity: Where all classes take truns at all of the roles. Some have taken it to far and yelling there is no trinity and making some view this game as easy and for soft gamers. Its not! If anything its harder.

I get that you're trying to argue that GW2 is not necessarily an easy game, but you're going about it the wrong way.

I agree that some people say that GW2 will be easy and a zergfest because it doesn't have the trinity. You are trying to argue that this statement is wrong because GW2 does indeed have the trinity, therefore the argument is invalid, and GW2 is not necessarily an easy game.

But this is the wrong way to go about it, because the above argument isn't wrong because GW2 has the trinity, it is wrong because a non-trinity game is not necessarily easy. There are PLENTY of examples of non-trinity games that are very hard and involve lots of teamwork, like just about any decent coop FPS.

In fact, the presence of the trinity almost makes the game easier in my eyes, because the trinity essentially means that there is ONE tactic, or slight variations of that tactic, that is applicable in almost every scenario. In a non-trinity game, you actually have to think about what tactics you are going to use to overcome situations.